Sie sind auf Seite 1von 27

Running head: THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF

The VA ADVANCE Initiative: The Influence of Employee Attitudes on Training Participation Shari King Colorado State University Research Methods EDRM 600 Dr. Karen Kaminski February 19, 2012

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF The VA ADVANCE Initiative: The Influence of Employee Attitudes on Training Participation Even before retired General Shinseki took the helm of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), he vowed to lead a transformation of VA into the 21st century. On January 21, 2009, he became the seventh Secretary for Veterans Affairs. By June of 2010, VAs 2010-2014 Strategic Plan promised an agency that would be people-centric, results-driven and forward-

looking (p. 1). At the heart of our organizational effort will lie the training and development of our people... (p. 24). From this vision, in July 2010 the ADVANCE program was launched with an objective of transforming potential into performance. John U. Seplveda, Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration, announced the rollout saying, The thinking behind ADVANCE is simple: investment in our employees means better service to our veterans (2010, p. 4). In an era where federal agencies must justify every expenditureand many budgets are being cut--VA received a 15.5 percent increase in President Obamas 2010 Spending Plan over VAs 2009 budget. ADVANCE represents an unprecedented, long-term investment in the professional and personal growth of each and every VA employee nationwide (http://vaww.va.gov/ADVANCE/faqs.html#faqs1). ADVANCE training is available to VA employees via instructor-led and online courses that employees may access from work or at home on topics ranging from effective workplace practices to leadership to time and stress management and nearly everything in betweentruly, something for every employee at every level. Secretary Shinsekis vision of a transformed VA cannot be realized unless employees also commit to that goal and take part in the process. VA has made a huge commitment to its employees personal and professional development through the ADVANCE initiative, but its

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF success requires that employees take advantage of the opportunities offered. How can VA

amplify employee participation? This, of course, is a challenge that has been faced before. What follows is a review of published research related to employee attitudes toward participation in Human Resource and Development (HRD) programs. Literature Review In Catalyzing Employee Change with Transformative Learning, Franz (2010) presents an argument that although employers are investing an estimated 2.15 percent of payroll in employee training (ASTD, 2008), transformational learning requires more than employee training and development. ASTDs 2011 State of the Industry Report revealed an average expenditure per employee of $1,228 in 2010 (Green, 2011)! For transformational change to occur, Franz (2010) asserts that learning must involve the type of critical reflection that causes individuals to explore, question, affirm and change their frames of reference (p. 113). She compares this to instrumental and communicative learning, which are more skills based than transformational due to a lack of opportunities for critical dialogue to effect enduring personal and organizational change. That being said, employers investments in HRD for transformational change rely on employee participation to be effective. According to Hurtz and Williams (2009), Given the self-directed nature of many employee development activities, it is crucial to gain an understanding of factors that encourage employees to pursue these activities in a proactive manner, and to participate and learn from them (p. 635). Their study expanded on the framework developed by Fishbein and Ajzen, which is based on the theory of reasoned action (TRA) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Their framework has been successfully tested to predict employee and management participation in organizational training. Their model is based foremost on intention to participate as an affect of

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF attitudes (Whats in it for me?), subjective norms (expectations of others), and perceived control (availability, choice, self-efficacy, and constraints). Their study included factors related to

satisfaction derived from participation as a predictor of future participation. Their study revealed that the availability of training that is perceived to be worthwhile as well as social and organizational supportiveness have the greatest impact on employees attitudes toward training. A personal mindset toward continuous learning was determined to have a positive effect on attitudes leading to training participation and that choice (voluntariness and choice of content) may actually discourage participation. This runs counter to the work of Baldwin, Magjuka and Loher (1991), whose research focused on the factor of choice on pre-training attitudes and training outcomes. Ability was also considered, however Baldwin, et al., agree with Maier (1973) that, even if individuals possess the prerequisite ability to learn the content of a course, performance will likely be poor if motivation is low or absent (p. 51-52). In theory adults who participate in the process of needs assessment would have a higher motivation to learn. They cite the research of Deci (1980), Hicks and Klimoski (1987) as well as that of Salancik (1977) that choice (defined as the freedom to attend training) had a positive impact on post-training reactions and learning assessments. On the other hand, they considered the potential negative impact of the frustration effect, resulting from individuals being offered a choice, but whose choices were not accepted, on motivation compared to having no choice. In their study, Baldwin, et al., offered a training course to three separate groups. The first and second groups were offered a choice from a list of four courses, both lists were manipulated so that the experimental module would most likely be chosen. The first group was denied their choice, the second group was granted their choice and the third group was offered no choice other than the experimental module. Based on their findings,

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF motivation to participate and training outcomes are highest for those granted their choice of training and lowest for those denied their choice of training, with outcomes likely being related to trainee motivation. If choice is offered, then a denial of that choice may be counterproductive to training outcomes. Also regarding choice, in an article published in Human Resource Development Review, Greg Wang (2006) cites a 2001 report by ASTD and the Masie Center indicating that participation rates in mandatory e-learning programs was 69 percent versus 32 percent for voluntary training. However those participation rates may not account for up to 50 percent of trainees who initiate but fail to complete training. Wangs research highlighted the fact that participation and completion are dependent upon motivation to learn. He points out that HRD interventions are typically developed with the expectation or requirement that employees participate and therefore may not be considered completely voluntary even if participants are offered a choice of training. Wangs conceptual framework identifies four clusters of constructs leading to learning participation and dropout: an Individual Cluster, a Learning Process Cluster, an Organizational Cluster and an Environmental Cluster. Of the four, the Learning Process Cluster and the Environmental Cluster relate to factors that are outside the control of the participant (i.e., instructional design and economic conditions). It should be noted that no evidence could be found that Wangs framework has been tested for reliability and soundness, however the variables identified as part of the Individual Cluster and the Organizational Cluster do seem to have significant relevance to the motivational theories at large. In fact, the majority of research that could be found related to HRD interventions has been conducted by Raymond Noe. Building on Kirkpatricks hierarchical model of training outcomes, Noe and Schmitt (1986) presented a model of motivational influences on training

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF effectiveness that incorporates the personal (i.e., locus of control, job involvement, and

expectancies) and environmental (defined as favorability of the work environment) influences on trainees attitudes and learning and training outcomes. Noe and Schmitt, in agreement with Maier (1973), specifically excluded trainee ability from their analysis. They described motivation to learn as a specific desire on the part of the trainee to learn the content of the training program (p. 501) and hypothesized that it would be influenced by the extent to which trainees identified psychologically with their work and engaged in career exploration behavior, including self-assessment of interest, skill strengths and weakness, and career planning (p. 502). A favorable work environment is described as one where opportunities to practice skills or use knowledge acquired in the training program and the probability of receiving reinforcement from supervisor and peers (p. 502) can be anticipated, and adequate resources are available. They hypothesized that this, too, would directly relate to trainees motivation to learn. They deduced from their findings that training funds may be wasted by forcing employees with low job involvement and lack of career interest to attend skill-improvement programs (p. 519); employees must see value in the training that will help them meet their career goals and perceive a supportive work environment. Noe and Wilk (1993) revisited the idea of employee participation in development activities, particularly with regard to continuous learning. They defined development activities as courses, workshops, seminars, and assignments that influence personal growth (Rosow & Zager, 1988). The conceptual model they proposed considered self-efficacy and characteristics of the work environment as primary antecedents to outcomes of developmental activities, indicating that learning attitudes, perception of development needs, and perceived benefits also influence the decision to participate. However their findings suggested that learning attitudes,

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF perceptions of development and perceived benefits explain more variance in development activity than self-efficacy and work environment characteristics (p. 299). As such, employees

motivation to participate may be improved by providing accurate information about development activities and that permitting employees to attend training activities of their choosing. Additionally, they suggest that employees who feel supported in their pursuit of developmental activities are more likely to participate than those who fear they will somehow be penalized for participating. Later, Noe (1996) studied the relationship of career management to training participation and job performance. Specifically, he considered three constructs of career management: career exploration (self-development), career goal setting, and career strategy development. The first two were measured by the Career Exploration Survey (CES) and the latter by the Career Strategies Inventory (CSI). No clear relationship was found between the three constructs. Yet another study considered the factors influencing mature-aged workers participation in training programs. This is particularly relevant when you considering the aging of the federal workforce, of which VA is part. Meyers, Billett and Kelly (2010) considered the personal and institutional factors that motivate training participation for workers aged from 45 to 64 years. The diversity of learning needs and motivations in this group discounted the potential effectiveness of a one-size-fits-all approach. They also found that external pressure was the primary motivation for attendance versus personal interest or desire, resulting in lower levels of engagement for those who did participate in training. The population studied also reflected low levels of self-confidence in their ability to learn and feelings of institutional support. While a small study population is seen as a limiting factor of the reliability of these outcomes, they do echo the research findings of larger populations.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Purpose

The overwhelming themes between the aforementioned studies are the impact of personal and organizational factors, specifically the perceived benefits to be gained and the level of support and resources provided by the organization. The purpose of this study was to identify how employee attitudes influence participation in ADVANCE training opportunities. More specifically, this study answered the following questions. 1. How do employee expectations regarding personal and/or professional benefits impact participation? 2. How does training choice influence employee participation? 3. What impact does organizational support (including resources) have on employee participation? The answers to these questions can be used to inform future agency efforts to increase the return on investment of the ADVANCE initiative for the VA, its employees, the American taxpayers and, ultimately, our nations veterans. Study Design This study attempted to determine the variables that impact employee attitudes toward ADVANCE training opportunities. Based on the literature reviewed, some major variables contributing to participation in developmental opportunities are employee expectations, choice, and organizational support. Expectations also are influenced by reactions to prior participation in similar training opportunities or the reputation of the training opportunities as reported by peers.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Methods

Similar to the studies in the literature reviewed, a cross-sectional survey (Creswell, 2012, p. 375) was determined to be the most appropriate method for this study. This method allowed for the collection of quantitative data to identify attitudes and evaluate programs (p. 405) using a single-phase study. Permissions Permission to conduct this survey at the VA Denver Regional Office was requested. The director granted conditional approval as long as official e-mail was not used and surveys were completed on employees' personal time. The researcher was granted permission to personally contact individuals within the organization known by the researcher. For purposes of this study, approval by the institutional review board was not required. Informed consent was implied by the completion and return of the survey form to the researcher. Participants A convenience sampling of VA employees in the Loan Guaranty division as well as various other employees in the Denver VA Regional Office (VARO) known by the researcher was used, with a goal of collecting at least 30 properly completed surveys. Due to the small size of this study, no attempt was made to stratify the participant population and no demographic data other than education level was collected. Instrument The specific instrument used was an adaptation of the survey developed by Hurtz and Williams (2009). As previously indicated, their study was based on the Fishbein-Ajzen framework which has "proven useful for predicting a wide variety of behaviors" (p. 636). Their study was conducted in two phases, the second of which excluded several questions that were not

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF used in their study. As such, other than one demographic question about educational level and another regarding job satisfaction, those questions were excluded from this study as well. To minimize disruption in the workplace, the survey was abbreviated so that respondents could be reasonably expected to complete the survey within 15 minutes, therefore several additional questions from the original version were excluded that did not have direct applicability to the purpose of this study and the specific research questions identified. As recommended by

10

Dr. Hurtz (personal communication February 21, 2012), response choices were modified from a seven-point to a five-point scale. The four original general Past Participation in Development Experiences questions, each followed by several questions of greater specificity, were reduced to three General Participation in Developmental Activities questions, and questions regarding availability and voluntariness as factors were eliminated to reduce respondent confusion. The remaining questions were adapted to specify "ADVANCE courses" in place of language referring to developmental activities in general. The complete survey (Appendix A) included six general questions related to self development and perceived organizational supportiveness. Additionally, 20 questions about participation in ADVANCE courses "during the past year" were asked as well as 20 questions related to future participation in ADVANCE courses "during the next three months". Ordinal responses to General Participation in Development Activities ranged from 0 (none/never) to 4 (more); all of which were converted to a 1-5 scale, ranging from lowest to highest. The Likert scales for all other questions ranged from 1 (disagree) to 5 (agree). The following is a summary each category of measures.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF General questions. In addition to questions about educational status, perceived comparative organizational

11

supportiveness, and job satisfaction, participants were asked to identify the frequency during the past year of seeking assessment of their strengths and weaknesses, attending ADVANCE courses, and time spent outside of work on personal development. Evaluation of ADVANCE courses taken. Ten questions related to perceptions of past training experiences, particularly regarding the perceived value to the individual and the quality of the training. Ten additional questions inquired about choice, reputation of training courses, availability, and organizational support. Feelings about future participation in ADVANCE courses. Self-perceptions regarding motivations for self development were explored in the first three questions, followed by four questions about choice, and three regarding potential barriers to participation (specifically, time, resources, and availability). The final ten questions relate to the perceived personal and professional benefits of participation in ADVANCE courses. Data Collection Procedures Surveys were personally distributed by paper copy to participants with a return envelope for respondent privacy. A response deadline of March 31, 2012, was established. Since all participants work in the same building as the researcher, respondents were asked to return surveys directly to the researcher by the due date. A 100 percent response rate was achieved and 30 completed surveys were received. Data Analysis The raw data from the surveys was entered into Excel. In order to normalize the data, the General Participation questions were standardized to scores of 1-5 (NOTE: None of the

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF

12

participants selected the sixth option of Doctorate degree for Education Status, so that option was eliminated). Additionally, several questions with a negative connotation in relation to the majority of questions were reverse scored (see Appendix B) to prevent those questions from skewing the data. For example, a response of "5" indicating agreement with the statement "I thought the experiences were a waste of my time" was reverse scored as "1". In the few instances where questions were left blank, a score of "3" indicating neutrality was assigned. Multiple questions related to the same overarching variable were summed for each participant to calculate an overall score (Creswell, 2012) for that construct and reviewed individually for any specific significance to the construct. Statistical analysis was then completed using the Analysis ToolPak add-in for Microsoft Excel. General questions. Responses to the General Questions provide insight to the survey participants (Table 1). What was their level of education? Did they spend personal time on development activities? Were they satisfied in their jobs? Did they seek feedback regarding developmental needs? Is their department is supportive of developmental activities? The responses revealed the following: 51 percent of the participants hold a college degree, 67 percent are satisfied or ecstatic with their jobs, 90 percent felt their departments are supportive of ADVANCE training, 75 percent of participants seek skills assessment once per month or more, 43 percent have taken three or more ADVANCE courses during the past year, and only two participants have never participated in an ADVANCE course.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Table 1. Responses to General Questions.


n High School 6 9 2 8 5 % 20% 30% 7% 27% 17% Much Less n 2 1 11 8 8 % 7% 3%

13

Education

Some College Associates Degree Bachelors Degree Masters Degree

Dept. Support

Somewhat Less Equal Somewhat More Much More

37% 27% 27%

Miserable

0 1 9 17 3

0% 3% 30% 57% 10%

Never

8 14 3 0 5

27% 47% 10% 0% 17%

Job Sat.

Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Ecstatic

Skill Assess.

Monthly Weekly Daily More

None

2 7 8 3 10

7%

Never

5 8 7 4 6

17% 27% 23% 13% 20%

Participation

Two Three More

27% 10% 33%

Self-Dev.

One

23%

Monthly Weekly Daily More

The remaining questions were grouped as they pertained to the variables of Expectations, Choice, Organizational Support, and Intent [to participate in future ADVANCE courses] (Appendix B). Appendix B identifies the questions included in each construct as well as the mean and standard deviation for each question and combined construct. Expectations construct. Expectations were measured as a construct of 10 survey questions related to Reactions to Previous Training and 10 questions related to Anticipated Benefits (personal and professional) regarding future training. Reactions to training were positive overall (M=3.948), however 12 out of 30 participants indicated that at times they found themselves wishing they were doing something else and felt the activities and experiences didnt necessarily focus on areas where they felt they needed improvement. Responses indicated there was strong agreement (M=3.824)

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF among the participants that there would be personal benefits to participating in ADVANCE

14

training, however participants did not agree that ADVANCE courses would lead to professional benefits such as opportunities to take on more interesting work tasks (M=2.9), or increase my chances for promotion (M=2.2). Choice construct. A total of four questions addressed Choice; two were based on previous ADVANCE courses taken and two were based on future participation in ADVANCE courses. Responses once again reflected agreement that the choice to participate has been (M=3.033) and will be (M=3.267) up to them and indicates that, for the most part, they have had (M=4.067) and will have (M=3.7) the freedom to pick and choose the classes in which they participate. Organizational Support construct. Organizational Support was also evaluated based on multiple questions, including relative supportiveness, incentive, and encouragement as well as availability of courses, time, and resources. Organizational support based on a comparison to other departments/units (M=3.633) in addition to incentive (M=2.667) and encouragement (M=3.433), for a combined average of 3.183, with incentive ranking lowest. This was supported by the responses to questions related to Expectations (discussed earlier) indicating little or no expectations for professional benefits related to ADVANCE courses. Finally, the constructs of Expectations, Choice, and Organizational Support were compared to Intent to participate in future training (Appendix B) to evaluate the potential Pearson correlations (Table 2) and then diagrammed on scatterplots (Figures 1, 2, and 3) using the Excel Analysis Toolpak. Only Expectations was found to have a strong positive correlation (Table 2) to Intent to participate in future ADVANCE courses is Expectations. All three

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF scatterplots reflect a positive linear correlation as identified by an increasing regression line

15

(Creswell, 2010) as could be imagined passing through the center of the plotted points from the bottom left to the top right of each diagram (Types of Correlation, 2010). The strongest positive correlation (=0.7150364)--between Intent and Expectations--is indicated by the closeness of the points to that line. The fact that the points are scattered slightly farther from the line for Organizational Support is indicative of a weaker, but still positive, correlation to Intent (=0.426343591). As indicated in Table 2, the scatterplot for Choice reflects a weak positive correlation (=0.304002905).
Table 2. Correlations between Intent, Expectations, Choice and Organizational Support. Intent Intent Expectations Choice Org. Support Figure 1. Intent (x)/Expectations (y)
Expectations
50 40 30 10 20 10 0 0 10 20 5 0 0 10 20 20 15

Expectations 1 1 0.6657934 0.400286646 Figure 2. Intent (x)/Choice (y)


Choice

Choice

Org. Support

0.7150364 0.3807045 0.426343591

1 0.304002905 1 Figure 3. Intent (x)/Org. Support(y)


Org. Support
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20

The responses to the general questions do not directly respond to the research questions, but do provide insight into the respondents. The results point to a group of employees who are likely to be motivated toward self-improvement activities. In general, they are well educated, routinely seek awareness about their strengths and weaknesses, and invest personal time in self-development activities. With the vast majority reporting job satisfaction and organizational

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF

16

support for self development, the environment would seem to be conducive to self-development as well. The mean scores for questions related to reactions (M=3.948) and anticipated benefits (M=3.824) are indicative of positive attitudes toward the training for personal reasons even if the training was not expected to benefit them professionally. The strong positive correlation between employee expectations and intentions to participate (=0.7150364) is an indicator that participants with the most positive expectations are the most likely to participate in ADVANCE courses. There was agreement among respondents that they have been able to freely choose in which courses to participate (M=4.067), however their participation may not have been completely voluntary (M=3.033). Participants seemed rather confident that they would be able to participate in future ADVANCE courses if they so choose, indicating a positive attitude toward ADVANCE courses as related to choice (M=3.517). Even so, the ability to choose whether to take an ADVANCE course or which course to take appears to have a weak positive correlation (=0.3807045) with employee intentions to participate. Respondents reported having supportive departments that encourage ADVANCE training, yet organizational incentive to participate is lacking (M=2.667). Participants reported having adequate resources (M=3.9) to participate and that relevant courses are readily available (M=3.567), however time appears to be a barrier for many (M=2.7). In an otherwise supportive organization, anticipated personal benefits may sufficiently outweigh the lack of professional incentive to participate, but a lack of time may be insurmountable. This single factor may have had a significant negative influence on this construct.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Discussion

17

Comparing these outcomes to Hurtz' and Williams' (2009) findings, this study similarly exposes that employee expectations and organizational support likely have a positive influence on employee attitudes towards employee development opportunities. These findings relate also to Wang's (2006) framework that individual and organizational factors influence training participation and Noe's (1996) findings that a supportive work environment may positively influence attitudes toward training participation. Despite a high response rate, the sample size of this study was too small to make any hard and firm determinations from the findings, however it does offer some insight into the many facets of employee attitudes that may potentially influence participation in professional development programs. In the future, a qualitative study to identify how employees have applied their ADVANCE training personally or on the job to improve organizational performance would afford additional information about employee motivations for participating in ADVANCE courses and how the ADVANCE initiative is ultimately benefitting the agency. Conclusions The ADVANCE initiative is at the heart of Secretary Shinseki's transformation plan for Veteran's Affairs. On the bright side, the findings of this study suggest that many employees are indeed taking advantage of this extraordinary opportunity for self-development! The scaffolding to create a transformative learning experience (Franz, 2010) has been built. The challenge will be to harness the power of employee attitudes for the benefit of the agency as well as the individual. An investment in employee development of this magnitude should ultimately improve the performance of VA employees on the job. However without the incentive of opportunities to use their learning on the job or hope that participation in training may lead to promotion

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF opportunities, the VA may find this investment a sunk cost (Noe & Schmitt, 1986, p. 519). Additionally, if employees feel that time is not provided to take advantage of ADVANCE

18

training opportunities (11 out of 30 respondents), they may not feel that the organization is truly committed to their development. A potential concern would be that rather than building their skill level to improve in their current position, they may instead choose to participate in training that will improve their skills to obtain opportunities elsewhere. This study suggests that participation in the VA ADVANCE initiative could be maximized by ensuring employees are offered the time to participate in ADVANCE courses as well as opportunities to apply their new skills on the job. Ultimately, such changes would improve the return on investment for all stakeholders!

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF References ASTD. (2008). http://www.astd.org/NR/rdonlyres/9C6650F1-1410-412E-977213F41E1963C7/0/ASTD_SOIR_2002_Executive_Summary_v2.pdf (as cited by Franz) ASTD. (2010). Baldwin, T. T., Magjuka, R. J., & Loher, B. T. (1991, Spring). The perils of participation: Effects of choice of training on trainee motivation and learning. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 51-65.

19

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Deci, E. L. (1980). The psychology of self-determination. Lexington, MA: Heath (as cited by Baldwin, et al.) Franz, N. (2010, Spring). Catalyzing employee change with transformative learning. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 113-118. Green, M., & McGill, E. (2011, November 1). 2011 state of the industry: Increased commitment to workplace learning. T + D, 65(11), 44-50. Hicks, W. D., & Klimoski, R. J. (1987). Entry into training programs and its effects on training outcomes: A field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 542-552 (as cited by Baldwin, et al.) Hurtz, G. M., & Williams, K. J. (2009, May). Attitudinal and motivational antecedents of participation in voluntary employee development activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(), 635-653. doi:10.1037/a0014580 Maier, N. F. (1973). Psychology in industrial organizations. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin (as cited by Hurtz & Williams).

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF

20

Meyers, R., Billett, S., & Kelly, A. (2010). Mature-aged workers learning needs and motivations for participation in training programs. International Journal of Training Research, 8(2), 116-127. Noe, R. A. (1986, Oct). Trainees attributes and attitudes: Neglected influences on training effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 736-749. doi:10.5465/AMR.1986.4283922. Noe, R. A. (1996, Mar). Is career management related to employee development and performance? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17(2), 119-133. Noe, R. A., & Schmitt, N. (1986, Autumn). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of a model. Personnel Psychology, 39(), 497-523. Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993, Apr). Investigation of the factors that influence employees participation in development activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2)(2), 291302. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.291 Salancik, G. R. (1977). Job involvement, participation in decision making, personal background and job behavior. In B. M. Staw, & G. R. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior (pp. 1-54). Chicago, IL: St. Clair Press (as cited by Baldwin, et al.). Types of Correlation. (2010). http://www.ditutor.com/regression/types_correlation.html Wang, G. G., & Wang, J. (2006, Aug). Toward a theory of HRD learning participation. Human Resource Development Review, 3(4), 326-353.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix A

21

SURVEY OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION IN ADVANCE COURSES


On this survey you will be asked about your participation during the past year in various ADVANCE courses taken in person or online through the VA TMS, your reactions and attitudes toward those activities, and your expected participation in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. Please give your honest and candid responses to these questions. Mark your responses directly on this survey and return it to Shari King by March 31, 2012. The purpose of this survey is to collect information about your attitudes and perceptions toward the ADVANCE courses you have been involved in (in person or online through the VA Training Management System (TMS)) and your expectations about participating in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. This survey is part of a research methods course being completed by Shari King at Colorado State Universitys School of Education. This survey is an opportunity for you to share some of your opinions and perceptions in a confidential manner. The results of the survey will be used to identify recommendations for improving participation in employee development programs. Your responses are confidential. Employees in Loan Guaranty and a few others throughout the VA Denver Regional Office are being invited to participate in this study. No names are being collected, so no one will know who filled out the survey. This survey was NOT initiated by VA, and management will never see your individual responses to the questions. Please return your survey directly to Shari King. Time Commitment This survey has been abbreviated from the original version*. The survey should only take about 15 minutes of your time to complete. Please note that management approval of this project was dependent on participants completing this survey on their own time (before or after work, on breaks or at lunch). Participation is voluntary. If you choose not to participate, there will be no penalty and it will not affect any aspect of your employment. You may leave any question blank, but we ask you to answer as many questions as you can. Questions? If you have any questions about this project or your rights as a volunteer participant, please contact Shari King by e-mail at shari.king@comcast.net or by phone at 303-249-2565. Please turn the page and begin completing the survey.

* The original version of this survey was created by Dr. Greg Hurtz for his doctoral dissertation at the University at Albany, State University of New York.

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix A GENERAL QUESTIONS

22

Instructions: These first few questions request general background information from you. Please respond to the following questions by checking or circling your answer. 1. Educational status: ____ High school graduate or less ____ Some collegeno degree ____ Associates degree ____ Bachelors degree ____ Masters degree ____ Doctorate degree 2. In your opinion, how does your department/unit compare to other departments/units in terms of the degree to which employee development is supported and encouraged? ____ Much More supportive ____ Somewhat More supportive ____ Equally supportive ____ Somewhat Less supportive ____ Much Less supportive

JOB SATISFACTION
Please circle the face that best expresses how you feel about your job in general, including the work, the pay, the supervision, the opportunities for promotion, and the people you work with:

Ecstatic

Satisfied

Neutral

Dissatisfied

Miserable

GENERAL PARTICIPATION IN DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES


1. How often in the past year have you sought information and feedback about your strengths and weaknesses in terms of your job-related knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics? (Examples: personal reflection, discussion with co-workers or supervisors, mentors, friends) None 0 Daily 1 Weekly 2 Monthly 3 More 4

2. During the past year, how many ADVANCE courses you have you taken (in-person or online through the VA TMS)? None 0 One 1 Two 2 Three 3 More 4

3. How frequently in the past year have you spent your own time outside of work reading books or periodicals, browsing the Internet or engaging in other developmental activities to help stay current or get ahead in your line of work? Never 0 Daily 1 Weekly 2 Monthly 3 More 4

* If you have not taken an ADVANCE course, please Skip to Page 2, Question 11. *

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix A EVALUATION OF ADVANCE COURSES TAKEN

23

Instructions: Considering your participation in ADVANCE courses in the past year please respond to the following questions regarding your overall evaluation of these experiences. Circle the number to the right of each statement that indicates the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE

1. I have enjoyed these experiences (they were fun). 2. I have been satisfied with these experiences (they were worthwhile). 3. I often found myself wishing I was doing something else. 4. I found the experiences to be relevant and useful to my job responsibilities. 5. I thought the experiences were a waste of my time. 6. I felt the activities and experiences focused on areas where I needed improvement. 7. I found the experiences helpful and practical. 8. I thought the people in charge of the activities were competent and wellprepared. 9. I felt the quality of any materials and/or exercises was satisfactory. 10. I gained valuable knowledge and/or new skills. 11. I have had the freedom to pick and choose which ADVANCE courses I participated in. 12. The decision of whether or not to participate in ADVANCE courses during the past year has been left entirely up to me. 13. Even if I wanted to participate in employee development activities, I just haven't had the time. 14. The necessary resources for participation in ADVANCE courses have not been available to me . 15. ADVANCE courses have had a reputation for being a waste of time. 16. Most people I know have thought the ADVANCE courses were beneficial. 17. Most people I know have avoided participating in employee development activities , unless they were required to. 18. My department/unit has recognized and rewarded participation in ADVANCE courses. 19. My department/unit has done very little to encourage participation in ADVANCE courses. 20. ADVANCE courses and resources have been advertised and made readily available .

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix A FEELINGS ABOUT FUTURE PARTICIPATION IN ADVANCE COURSES

24

Instructions: Please respond to the following questions regarding your feelings about participating in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. Circle the number to the right of each statement that indicates the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement.
DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE

1. I want to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. 2. I intend to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. 3. Every employee should participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months if they have the opportunity. 4. The decision of whether or not I participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months will be entirely up to me. 5. In the next three months, I will have the freedom to pick and choose which ADVANCE courses I participate in. 6. In the next three months, if an ADVANCE course looks interesting or beneficial to me I will be able to participate. 7. In the next three months, I will not be able to participate in many ADVANCE courses even if I would like to participate. 8. Even if I want to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months, I just won't have the time. 9. The necessary resources for participation will not be available to me during the next three months. 10. To my knowledge, there are no ADVANCE courses being offered or endorsed during the next three months that are relevant to me. If I participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months it will... 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. help me to gain knowledge or skills that I could not gain on my own. help me to perform my job better. make my job easier. give me a needed break from my job. allow me to take on more interesting work tasks. increase my chances for a pay raise or promotion. increase my self-confidence at work. be beneficial to my career in the long-run. make me a more well-rounded person in general. help further my personal development.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

DISAGREE

NEUTRAL

AGREE

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey! Please return to Shari King by March 31. I truly appreciate your participation and contribution to my research project!

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix B Construct Key

25

This table documents each construct and the specific questions included as well as the number of respondents for each response (1/Disagree-5/Agree). (NOTE: Questions in italics were reverse scored.) CONSTRUCT Questions EXPECTATIONS Reactions I have enjoyed these experiences (they were fun). I have been satisfied with these experiences (they were worthwhile). I often found myself wishing I was doing something else. I found the experiences to be relevant and useful to my job responsibilities. I thought the experiences were a waste of my time. I felt the activities and experiences focused on areas where I needed improvement. I found the experiences helpful and practical. I thought the people in charge of the activities were competent and well-prepared. I felt the quality of any materials and/or exercises was satisfactory. I gained valuable knowledge and/or new skills. Anticipated Benefits If I participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months it will... help me to gain knowledge or skills that I could not gain on my own. help me to perform my job better. make my job easier. give me a needed break from my job. allow me to take on more interesting work tasks. increase my chances for a pay raise or promotion. increase my self-confidence at work. be beneficial to my career in the long-run. make me a more well-rounded person in general. help further my personal development. n M 3.275 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 3.333 3.400 2.800 3.333 3.700 3.133 3.500 3.367 3.467 3.400 SD 1.072 0.994 1.070 1.400 0.959 1.291 0.973 0.938 1.033 0.860 0.932

30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

3.533 3.367 3.033 3.033 2.900 2.200 3.300 3.400 3.467 3.833

1.074 0.964 0.999 1.450 1.029 0.925 1.179 1.102 1.252 1.020

n=number of responses, M=Mean, SD=standard deviation (bold represents constructs)

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix B Construct Key CONSTRUCT Questions CHOICE I have had the freedom to pick and choose which ADVANCE courses I participated in. The decision of whether or not to participate in ADVANCE courses during has been left entirely up to me. In the next three months, if an ADVANCE course looks interesting or beneficial to me I will be able to participate. In the next three months, I will not be able to participate in many ADVANCE courses even if I would like to participate. ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT Relative Supportiveness: In your opinion, how does your department/unit compare to other departments/units in terms of the degree to which employee development is supported and encouraged? Incentive: My department/unit has recognized and rewarded participation in ADVANCE courses. Encouragement: My department/unit has done very little to encourage participation in ADVANCE courses. Availability1: ADVANCE courses and resources have been advertised and made readily available . Availability2: To my knowledge, there are no ADVANCE courses being offered or endorsed during the next three months that are relevant to me. Time1: Even if I wanted to participate in employee development activities, I just haven't had the time. Time2: Even if I want to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months, I just won't have the time. Resources1: The necessary resources for participation in ADVANCE courses have not been available to me. Resources2: The necessary resources for participation will not be available to me during the next three months. n M 3.517 30 30 30 30 4.067 3.033 3.267 3.700 3.333 30 3.633 SD

26

1.189 1.048 1.273 1.413 1.022 1.048 1.129

30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

2.667 3.433 3.567 3.300 3.133 2.700 3.900 3.667

1.061 1.040 0.971 0.988 1.279 1.088 0.995 0.884

n=number of responses, M=Mean, SD=standard deviation (bold represents constructs)

THE VA ADVANCE INITIATIVE: THE INFLUENCE OF Appendix B Construct Key CONSTRUCT Questions INTENT I want to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. I intend to participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months. Every employee should participate in ADVANCE courses during the next three months if they have the opportunity. n M 3.5667 30 30 30 3.4667 3.5000 3.7333 SD

27

1.1524 1.2521 1.2247 0.9803

n=number of responses, M=Mean, SD=standard deviation (bold represents constructs)

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen